Proposal: Add (&) to Data.Function

[Michael Sloan]

If you're having bikeshedding problems, I feel bad for you son.  Lens got
99 operators, but a (|>) ain't one.

In all seriousness though, in light of edward's detailed reasonings, I'm
fully behind (&) instead of (#).  ML-compatibility shouldn't be the
concern, and the happenstance of (&) being relatively unused is a great
opportunity.  Frequently used operators with concise meanings should have
concise symbols - works out well!

-Michael

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Bryan O'Sullivan <bos at serpentine.com>wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Edward Kmett <ekmett at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> $. is kind of the worst of all possible worlds to me.
>>
>
> Agreed.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Libraries mailing list
> Libraries at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20121120/cde5598d/attachment.htm>